In a five-page letter that was emailed Friday to politicians, Air Canada vice-president Derek Vanstone argues that “the debate is off on the wrong foot.”

He emphasizes the need for broad consultation on what should happen at the airport, calling it a valuable resource for Toronto, while ensuring appropriate spending of infrastructure funds and respecting other users of the waterfront.

“The future of this public facility must be considered in light of what is best for Toronto, not what best drives one airline’s business strategy,” Vanstone writes in a letter, obtained by the Star. “Porter is certainly allowed to pursue its commercial interests, but the onus on city council is larger.”

Asked to comment on Vanstone’s letter, Porter spokesman Brad Cicero said Air Canada is worried more about Porter as a competitor than it is about the airport.

“Everybody does have access,” Cicero told the Star Friday evening, noting slots are granted by the port authority: if Porter wants more slots, it has to compete. Air Canada has challenged the slot allocation process and lost in court, he said.

Porter, he said, hopes Toronto councillors will vote in favour of a review of an existing ban on jets because it would ensure that necessary information on the expansion plan becomes available.

Last month, Porter Airlines announced it has placed a conditional order for up to 30 Bombardier CS100 jets, which would expand the airline’s reach to cities across North America and into the Caribbean. Jet service would begin in 2016.

But, to accommodate Porter’s expansion plans, the airport’s runway must be extended at both ends into the lake to handle the bigger aircraft and an existing rule that ban jets must be lifted.

The three parties — Ottawa, the Toronto Port Authority and the city — that signed the tripartite agreement governing island airport operations would need to sign off on any changes. Both the federal government and the port authority, which operates the airport, have said they want to hear from city council first.

Rob Ford supports the Porter expansion and has agreed to move the plan forward. He brought a surprise motion to executive committee to ask city manager Joe Penachetti to offer advice on the Porter proposal by July. City council will consider that motion next week.

Since Porter’s announcement, CEO Robert Deluce has been making the rounds to sell his plan to politicians.

He has also launched a direct email campaign urging Porter passengers to write their city councillors in support of the expansion. They can sign onto a website and emails will be sent off on their behalf.

Air Canada’s Vanstone expresses serious concerns about the plan, including Porter’s willingness to pay for the costs of the city study to look into noise levels, estimated upwards of $200,000.

“Porter’s recent offer to ‘pay’ the costs of the study that city staff will undertake is entirely improper and could constitute a conflict of interest,” Vanstone said. “Accepting this offer would set a dangerous precedent, and it would taint all of the findings that come out of the process.”

Air Canada has long complained that the island airport has unfairly benefitted Porter Airlines and Deluce, whose company also controls the terminal. Out of 202 daily takeoff and landing slots, Porter has 172. Air Canada has 30, usually on its Toronto-Montreal route.

In a conference call with analysts on Friday, Air Canada president and CEO Calin Rovinsecu said little when asked about the Porter initiative.

“We believe the Toronto island airport is not a private playground, and therefore carriers should have proper access to it,” he said.

In his letter, Vanstone argued that before the airport is expanded — if that’s the vision for the airport — “access must be available to all airlines wishing to fly from the airport.” He noted that it would benefit Air Canada, but other domestic and U.S. carriers would also be interested in operations there.

“We believe that rather than creating specific exemptions for Porter’s chosen type of jet, the noise parameters of operations overall should be considered — and any aircraft which meets the noise parameter should be permitted,” Vanstone wrote.

Bombardier is in the final stages of building the CS100 jet, due for a first test by the end of June. It has said the plane generates about the same noise level as the Q400 turboprops, the aircraft currently used by Porter.

Air Canada, which is also considering the CSeries jets as it replaces narrow-body planes, noted in its letter that “any noise data which exists on these aircraft is, at this point, purely hypothetical.”

Vanstone also took aim at Porter’s plan, by which, he alleges, “an individual user of a public entity is pursuing policy changes and infrastructure improvements for its sole enjoyment …”

He argued that Porter’s proposal should be viewed as “a play to further entrench its ability to use the Toronto City Airport exclusively and to the exclusion of all others, and ultimately, the appropriateness of anyone acceding to this request should be subject to review by the Competition Bureau.”

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.